Hive Fleet Gorgon netEA 0.6

atension

Post subject: Re: Hive Fleet Gorgon netEA 0.6

Posted: Thu Jul 12, 2018 2:48 pm

Hybrid

Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2012 11:00 pmPosts: 906Location: Toronto

Sky slashers addition - I understand the hole you are looking to fill as traditional stats have gargoyles as more FF oriented in assaults. Though sky skashers are technically swarms in 40k. Wouldn't they be too small to be represented in Epic. Also no idea how you'd model them. Maybe make the hive crone and/or harpy a little more cost effective and have them fill the CC gap?

Idea to change change - ditch the sky slashers and use the harpy/crones as your flying CC work horses. This would also make flyrants less unfavourable in the flying swarms so they arent as easily sniped with AT fire. Drop a bit of shooting from them to make them a little more cost effective. Add unit size ~4 sporoswarm (representing a combination of sporocysts and mucoloid spores) as a teleport or even just planetfall with added capacity on the hive ship. Have the following stats: immobile or 10cm, Ar +4, CC +4, FF+4, 30cm AA 5+, 30cm AP4/AT5 (venom cannon) fits with fluff, more practical to model, and Nids traditionally have poor AA. The crone I think with 35cm move and being able to bury them in a swarm makes for quite effective AA.

Also pyrovors I can't see being taken that often. They add some better assault numbers to the artillery swarm but would only act as a minor deterant to being assaulted.

Copy paste error - Under the vanguard organism special rule. You have "vanguard organismvanguard organism"

Like the change on the lictor swarm plan on using at least one large swarm of lictors.

I agree on sky slasher swarms. They seem to small to be represented on the epic scale.

atension wrote:

Sky slashers addition - I understand the hole you are looking to fill as traditional stats have gargoyles as more FF oriented in assaults. Though sky skashers are technically swarms in 40k. Wouldn't they be too small to be represented in Epic. Also no idea how you'd model them. Maybe make the hive crone and/or harpy a little more cost effective and have them fill the CC gap?

Yeah I thought about that. They seemed bigger than most swarm creatures in 40k (and therefore reasonable in epic), when I compared them to rippers for instance. But now that I rechecked on FWs site then they kind of do look similar in size it just the wings that make them look a lot bigger. I guess I'll take them away in the next iteration. Iäm not at all married to the idea of including them. It was just an afterthought really.

atension wrote:

Idea to change change - ditch the sky slashers and use the harpy/crones as your flying CC work horses. This would also make flyrants less unfavourable in the flying swarms so they arent as easily sniped with AT fire. Drop a bit of shooting from them to make them a little more cost effective. Add unit size ~4 sporoswarm (representing a combination of sporocysts and mucoloid spores) as a teleport or even just planetfall with added capacity on the hive ship. Have the following stats: immobile or 10cm, Ar +4, CC +4, FF+4, 30cm AA 5+, 30cm AP4/AT5 (venom cannon) fits with fluff, more practical to model, and Nids traditionally have poor AA. The crone I think with 35cm move and being able to bury them in a swarm makes for quite effective AA.

I wanted the list to have more shooting options compared to onachus so I'm hesitant to lower the shooting power of the flying AVs

atension wrote:

Also pyrovors I can't see being taken that often. They add some better assault numbers to the artillery swarm but would only act as a minor deterant to being assaulted.

True that. Can you see an alternative statline for them? Not worth including? Or perhaps just ok to have them as a seeminlgy subpar choice?

atension wrote:

Like the change on the lictor swarm plan on using at least one large swarm of lictors.

Good to hear. I too think they really needed a boost. I went with the points cost proposed by Dave and tested by the NDC, that have now also been incorporated into the onachus list.

wanted the list to have more shooting options compared to onachus so I'm hesitant to lower the shooting power of the flying AVs

I think you can accomplish both. Slightly less shooting on each model but have more of them. Remove the AA in favour of the spore AA unit. This would fill your assault CC gap in terror swarms. Increase number of AVs to protect/reduce AT sniping of Flyrants in terror swarm and would make your the crone/harpy swarms not so breakable. Being independant swarms without synapse they will rarely rally once broken. Very unfavourable use of points compared to the terror swarm.

I'm on board with this list. It's what I wanted from a modern nid army. My thoughts;

-I'd say change the name of the Tyranid Guard to Hive Guard (their actual 40k name). I'd also consider being able to add them to the brute swarm.-Agree on removal of the skyslashers-I miss the scaling swarms. Even if it was a single scale up. I liked how it allowed you to make more interesting swarms with war engines. -What is the reason for +20pts for gargs in the terror swarm but +15 in the normal swarm (assuming it's because they can actually use their speed in this detachment). Any thought to going down to 200 but dropping the minimum gargoyle units to 4 so you could make this either an infantry flying swarm or a AV/WE swarm?-Absolutely love the way the Hierophant is handled-Lictor & Biovore detachments are great. Higher lictor count is awesome and adding a zoanthrope to the biovores is well done.

Once my newest AoS army is done I'm going to dig back into Nids and this is exactly what I was looking for

I'm on board with this list. It's what I wanted from a modern nid army. My thoughts;

-I'd say change the name of the Tyranid Guard to Hive Guard (their actual 40k name). I'd also consider being able to add them to the brute swarm.

My intention is for a unit that could be used to represent both hive guard and tyrant guard. I didn't think they booth merited their own representation in epic scale. That's why I thought to name them, perhaps a bit dull, by the rather generic tyranid guard.

Hulksmash wrote:

-Agree on removal of the skyslashers

Will do so as that seems to be reasonable and what everyone has commented so far.

Hulksmash wrote:

-I miss the scaling swarms. Even if it was a single scale up. I liked how it allowed you to make more interesting swarms with war engines.

Will ponder on that. I found I hardly ever used the bigger swarms and therefore wanted to make the list structure a bit simpler.

Hulksmash wrote:

-What is the reason for +20pts for gargs in the terror swarm but +15 in the normal swarm (assuming it's because they can actually use their speed in this detachment). Any thought to going down to 200 but dropping the minimum gargoyle units to 4 so you could make this either an infantry flying swarm or a AV/WE swarm?

The 20 points is a cautious thing. We haven't had such a fast tyranid formation before. It's hard to know what that might be worth and how it could change tactics. I therefore thought being cautious and keep a higher price was the best way to start. My need to lower that to 15 later on or possibly raise the cost.

Please elaborate. How would you structure the formation so that it would be a possible with AV/WE swarm. Do you mean that 4 gargoyles could be swaped for AVs? My thinking is that a flying AV/WE unit fit better in the independent section.

Hulksmash wrote:

-Absolutely love the way the Hierophant is handled

Glad to hear it! I think the optionality is a better representation for the "ever evolving" fluf, to much option doesn't really fit epic though. I hope it's about the right amount, but let me know of any more ideas.

Hulksmash wrote:

-Lictor & Biovore detachments are great. Higher lictor count is awesome and adding a zoanthrope to the biovores is well done.

Hulksmash wrote:

Once my newest AoS army is done I'm going to dig back into Nids and this is exactly what I was looking for

With the scaling swarms I wasn't thinking the largest size but maybe the base size and a single step up for the double size. I've never seen or used that largest size but I think you could make some decent swarms at the double size. And the Terror swarm would benefit from the double size option as well as the brute swarm if someone wanted to double heirodules.

For the structure on the Terror swarm it was more dropping it to 4 gargoyles so that you could then transport the 4 gargs inside a Harridan if you choose and then fill out the rest of the detachment with a Tyrant & Crones/Harpies. Alternatively it could be built with warriors and all gargoyles or a mixture of the two. With it being a restricted swarm (1 per tyranid swarm) I don't think it's a huge deal.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum